THE ARBITRATION ACT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 206, 25 May 1908, Page 6

THE ARBITRATION ACT.

! While there is little in the long spcoch of the Attorney-General on the Arbitration Act that, is new, little that .any attentive reader of the newspapers has. not heard many times before, to do De. Findlay justice it must be conceded that there is not much that' most people will not agree with. With a good deal of his analysis of the causes leading up to the failure of the Act we are in special concurrence, for r some -of y'his might almost be taken, for /transcripts from articles that, have appeared in The Dominion. But he has failed to make out the case for the Act which presumably was his . purpose. . It is singular that an eminent lawyer, who is an accomplished "special pleader," should have given his case away so completely as to rest his defence of the Act's principle upon a number of postulates which caiinot possibly be granted. The Act, ho tells us, was " expected to discharge'with some measure of success " its function of settling industrial disputes—why! by the way, does he suggest "that that function was the- merely incidental purpose of a measure which proclaimed itself in its own title "An Act . .to facilitate the settlement of industrial disputes," etc. 1 ■ The j Act, he goes on, "has nqver had the cordial .co-operation; of employers and.employees.", ft "has had throughout the misfortune to be used by one side or other, not in a spirit of conciliation a3 a real arbitrator in a dispute; but as a means of industrial friction.!' " Had the Act had this co-operation," it would have realised all its aims. "It was assumed. the men and employers would, in dealing with these disputes, feel the . . same. genuine desire 'for peace on reasonable terms." In short, that newspaper which' set above the ; At-torney-General's . arguments . • the headlines: "Will still prevent strikes: If workers are loyal," all unconsciously achieved a masterpiece of humorously apt summary. in other words, showed that the success of the 'Act-' depends upon a great many hypotheses impossible of granting by those who stick to the facts of human nature instead of flying dff on the wings of visiohary speculation.

; Let us imagine a foreigner turning to Dr. Findlay's speech for an explanation of the recent outbreak of the strike fever. this," he will say, " is very true. I perceive that tho Act, designed as an emollient, has become a source of industrial irritation instead. In accordance with the law that Herbert Spencer laid down, and proved by such a wealth of examples, the Act has become utterly different in character from its original intention. But that does not satisfy my surprise at the arrival of this new •striko epoch. For these are phenomena common for many years, and the strikes arc of new growth. I must look further." 'The missing data are, of course: first, the facts relating to< the disappointment of Labour at finding that the Act, which raised wages from an unduly low level, cannot raise wages indefinitely ; and, second, the Government's maladministration of the law. Upon both these points' Dr. Findlay was noticeably silent, and yet they arc of far greater importance than tho obvious things that he demonstrated at such great length. The slaughtermen's strike was a symptom of Labour's growing feeling that it might rebel against tho Act with impunity, relying upon the political necessities of tho Government. That suspicion gradually gained strength, and was converted into certainty when the Government, yielding to trades-unionist pressure', consented last session to over-rido by statute a clause in an Arbitration Court award. Since then, Labour has practically taken complete charge of affairs, and strike after strike has occurred, until at last tho present Auckland strike was undertaken without heat and quito as if it

wore the ordinary course to adopt. The " new public opinion " that Dr. Findi.ay speaks of has no terrors for organised labour when it desires to fight. The main responsibility for this deplorable state of affairs lies upon the Government's shoulders. They have by their actions persuaded Labour that Mr. John Duthie was right when, on July 19, 1894, he prophesied that, as in America, strikes would take place, and that, in the same way, "this Bill [the parent Industrial Arbitration Bill] would be a dead-letter in the face of any difficulty that might arise here."

Unfortunately, it is impossible to say, without fear of contradiction, whether the Act would have prevented strikes and have borne the grc&t strain that would havo been i placed upon 1 it, if it had been courageously enforced. It is clear enough that it has becomc impotent and an object of,'contempt in the hands of the present Administration. " This country," said the Attorney-General, " will not permit—no country will permit—any class, however large, to enjoy all the advantages of legislation; to enforce against all other classes the penalties <\f legislation, and then themselves to violate that very legislation—and not only violate it, but do so with an ostentatious derision and contempt." But this 'is exactly, what has been permitted.' This crying injustice is what the Press of the' Dominion has been' protesting against for. months, and protesting in vain. Mo Arbitration Act can prevent the continuance and the aggravation of this condition of affairs unless the Government, is 'prepared to make striking inconvenient to the strikers. The life of any scheme of compulsory arbitration 'is the manner in which it is administered. The Act will still continue to bind only the employer, leaving the worker free, so long as the price of striking is'a nominal fine. ' Dr. Findlay' appears to have made no suggestion ■of a practical character respecting the amendments necessary to secure the peace of industry. Apparently wo must wait for details of the Government's intentions. ' The most feasible scheme yet suggested that will protect industry and avert the gross injustices of. the present system appears to be that devised by Mr. William Eraser, M.P. Nothing is more absurd than to treat Labour'as a wayward child, to be led Iby kindness 'and persuasion. If there is to be legislative regulation of industry, let it bo made stern and unsentimental. A disturbing feature of the ;Attorney-General's ; speech is the absence of evidence that he realises, or, realising, fears, the evil future of V system which has become nothing moro than a shield and a sword for. trades-unionism to use against the.unprotected remainder of the community. ; The looked anxiously to him for. a 'sign that the. Government intend to stand, up to a serious' danger; It. got, instead" little moro than an interesting and partial history of the last fourteen years' events; and a demonstration of the beauties that would spring from the Act if economic, laws did not exist, and human naturo' were something different from what it'